According to Spotlight PA, which investigated claims made on Pennsylvania cannabis companies’ websites, some of the companies are using misleading, inaccurate, or dangerous statements to promote marijuana for addiction treatment.
Spotlight PA is an independent, nonpartisan newsroom powered by The Philadelphia Inquirer in partnership with PennLive/The Patriot-News, TribLIVE/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, and WITF Public Media. Sign up for our free newsletters.
As part of a first-of-its-kind review, Spotlight PA found that some cannabis companies are using incomplete or misleading claims to promote marijuana as a treatment for opioid addiction, potentially putting patients’ lives at greater risk.
The newsroom examined more than 60 websites offering services in Pennsylvania and consulted numerous health-policy experts about the validity of the claims. In some instances where medical research was cited on a website or by a company official, the news organization directly contacted study authors.
Spotlight PA’s investigation found a wide range of misleading tactics: cherry-picking and misrepresenting parts of studies, making broad claims without citing any specific research, and providing incomplete information about what it takes to qualify for the state’s medical marijuana program.
About half the websites promoted cannabis dispensaries, while the other half were for physicians or companies that help certify patients.
According to several of the experts, online statements made by two companies helped patients become certified to buy medical marijuana at state dispensaries.
Without citing specific evidence, web pages for Releaf Specialists and Compassionate Certification Centers used identical language to claim research suggests medical marijuana can be a “viable substitute” for buprenorphine, one of three drugs approved by the federal government to treat opioid use disorder.
Several health-policy experts, cannabis researchers, and medical providers told Spotlight PA the claim was inaccurate, misleading, or possibly dangerous.
“The findings reveal a somewhat deceptive strategy — whether intentional or not — adopted by many dispensaries and cannabis certification websites where very specific and limited scientific research is often cited to support very broad statements about cannabis’ benefits,” Stephanie Lake, a postdoctoral fellow at the UCLA Cannabis Research Initiative, said in an email. “The result of this strategy is an oversimplified and scientifically inaccurate message about cannabis.”
